My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2025-05-13 Cindy Freitas Opposition Testimony Item #2
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Board Packets
>
2025
>
2025-05-15 - Leeward
>
Item #2 Boaz LLC (Formerly Koa Ventrues LLC) (SMA 437)
>
2025-05-13 Cindy Freitas Opposition Testimony Item #2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/14/2025 1:03:10 PM
Creation date
5/14/2025 12:48:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Plan Doc Template
Document Date
5/13/2025
Related Permits
SMA-03-000011
Permit Number
SMA 437
Parcel Number
750200210000
Description
Email opposition testimony
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
• Traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights <br /> • Public access <br /> See Haw. Rev. Stat. § 205A-2(c) (2023). Revoking the SMA permit may eliminate prior conditions <br /> meant to safeguard these interests. <br /> In Ka Pa`akai O Ka `Aina v. Land Use Comm'n, 94 Haw. 31, 7 P.3d 1068 (2000),** the Hawaii <br /> Supreme Court held that agencies must make findings to ensure the protection of constitutionally <br /> protected Native Hawaiian rights when considering land use decisions. These include: <br /> • Identification of cultural resources <br /> • The extent to which those practices will be affected <br /> • Measures to mitigate harm <br /> The Puapua`a region is a storied place (wahi papa) and contains resources of cultural, historical, and <br /> spiritual significance. Revoking the SMA permit without renewed environmental and cultural review <br /> would violate these constitutional obligations under Haw. Const. art.XII, § 7. <br /> In Mahuiki v. Planning Comm'n of County of Kauai, 65 Haw. 506, 654 P.2d 874 (1982)**, the <br /> Court emphasized the importance of due process and public involvement in SMA decisions.Any <br /> attempt to revoke and potentially reapply for new entitlements must go through full environmental <br /> review and community participation. <br /> Under Haw. Const. art.XI, § 1, and case law, the State and counties hold Hawai`i's natural resources <br /> in trust for the benefit of present and future generations. The Planning Commission has an affirmative <br /> duty to conserve,protect, and enhance coastal resources—not to deregulate them without substantial <br /> justification. <br /> The SMA Use Permit No. 437 was granted with environmental, cultural, and public trust safeguards. <br /> BOAZ LLC has presented no legal or factual basis for revocation. If the intent is to redevelop the <br /> parcel, the applicant should be required to submit a new SMA permit application and comply with: <br /> • A new Environmental Assessment(EA) or Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) <br /> • A Cultural Impact Assessment(CIA) <br /> • Public notice and hearing <br /> • Updatd shoreline management and climate resilience standards <br /> For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Planning Commission deny the request to revoke SMA <br /> Permit No. 437. <br /> Mahalo, <br /> Cindy Freitas <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.